netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 2/6] net: add add indirect call wrapper in skb_release_head

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CANn89i+bLvG0-v9nPF4R53UvFZ7im0=nzC-=K1+QeUDNxYbtNw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2025 00:41:20 -0700
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To: Jason Xing <kerneljasonxing@...il.com>
Cc: Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@...el.com>, "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, 
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>, 
	Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>, Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>, 
	Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...gle.com>, 
	Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, eric.dumazet@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 2/6] net: add add indirect call wrapper in skb_release_head_state()

On Mon, Oct 20, 2025 at 12:02 AM Jason Xing <kerneljasonxing@...il.com> wrote:
>

>
> Sorry, I've been away from the keyboard for a few days. I think it's
> fair to let us (who are currently working on the xsk improvement) post
> a simple patch based on the series.
>
> Regarding what you mentioned that 1% is a noisy number, I disagree.
> The overall numbers are improved, rather than only one or small part
> of them. I've done a few tests under different servers, so I believe
> what I've seen. BTW, xdpsock is the test tool that gives a stable
> number especially when running on the physical machine.
>
> @ Alexander I think I can post that patch with more test numbers and
> your 'suggested-by' tag included if you have no objection:) Or if you
> wish you could do it on your own, please feel free to send one then :)

The series focus was on something bringing 100% improvement.
The 1% figure _was_ noise.

I think you are mistaken on what a "SIgned-off-by: Eric Dumazet
<edumazet@...gle.com>" means.

I am not opposed to a patch that you will support by yourself.
I am opposed to you trying to let me take responsibility for something
I have no time/desire to support.

I added the indirect call wrapper mostly at the last moment, so that
anyone wanting to test my series
like I described (UDP workload) would not have to mention the sock_wfree cost.